Silicon Valley Regional

[DUCKIE]

Any idea who won Chairmans and Engineering Inspiration?

[alphaone]

Originally Posted by DUCKY

Any idea who won Chairmans and Engineering Inspiration?

Chairmans was 368. The Engineering Inspiration award went to 1359.

Congrats to both teams!

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by PhatMike

Six. Their rookie year was 1999.

7, you counted wrong

[TheOtherTaylor]

Wow 1351 got pwned in the semi-finals, lost both of our matches *sigh*

Oh well, our arm didn't work till the third to last match then not again till the last match our entire strategy depended on me throwing (my ) slick drivetrain in front of anyone who could possibly score and not drawing pentalties. What can one do?

Anyhoo, Good job to 980 254 and 22. No one stood a chance against that alliance (though I swear watching two almost identical bots go around made you think "wait... can they do that?")

[Eric Brummer]

For those of you who are wondering about the controversy during the Final match, the alliance, Red, had a higher score but was assessed 30 point penalty resulting in a win for Blue who then did far better in the second match thus winning 2 - 0.

The penalty itself was this; a red robot was in its loading zone, and a blue robot not touching it. It then was pushed into the red robot by another red robot. The judges used their best knowledge to assess the penalty to red seeing as how they caused blue to violate the rule.

The main problem behind it was, after the ruling was discussed, there was uncertainty about the existence of a rule allowing this, but they were unable to determine a "more official" ruling in the time needed while keeping everyone hanging. Everyone there worked very hard to see that the rulings were fair and attempted to clear things up as much as possible.

The rule itself is this:
Example 8
Robot "RED01" is in the red alliance loading zone, retrieving a tetra. Robot "BLUE01" next to the loading zone, but clearly not touching the loading zone or RED01. Robot "RED02" approaches BLUE01, and pushes BLUE01 into the loading zone, where it contacts RED01 and prevents it from completing the tetra retrieval. No penalty is assessed against either alliance. RED02 was the source of the interference. Because BLUE01 was merely the object used by RED02 to interfere, and not the source of the interference, it did not violate <G15>. The red alliance is not given a penalty, because interference with their own alliance partners is permitted (although not very wise). <Team Update #4, page 4.>

It's unfortunate that the Final round between such great teams had to have conflict, especially since the quarter finals had almost no penalties whatsoever. It was kinda sad to see such an absolutely great match have technical issues. I personally think it would have been nicer for an out right win. The final match has to be the most impressive display of competetive robots in FIRST I've seen.

There were many teams that were excellent and the alliances were great teamed together. I question whether any matches in Atlanta could top these last few games in the elimination rounds.

The Cheesy Poofs may have won along with their great alliance partners 980 and 22. (By the way 980, certainly no hard feelings for the match ups since you were concerned we'd frown upon your team not alliancing with us. It's a game with strategy, you had yours and we had ours. Both seemed up to par.)

254 definitely had a run for their money during the finals so this wasn't just "their 7th win." They fought hard and well. 840, 1072, and 668 almost took the Poofs and their alliance down before getting to the finals. These games were all close and an absolute amazement to watch. By some point I ceased caring who won in the pure excitement of how close the game was.

Thanks also to the Americorp people. They were absolutely wonderful working with in San Jose and Sacramento. The philosophy and idea behind Americorp is wonderful, and the people we worked with were personally wonderful people to meet and talk too.

Congradulations to all of the teams on their spirit, competitiveness and GP. Jason Morella was talking about how well we all did in the competition, not just as teams competing but in the spirit of FIRST and he wasn't just saying that. We were running ahead of schedule this weekend from what I was told and there were very little to no penalties. Working at the scoring table, it was very nice to have everything with the teams running smoothly and efficiently. It also helped we're one of the only regionals with Real Time Scoring functioning.

Congrats to the Finalists, and the award winners, and all of the teams that did their best. FIRST never gets old.

[phrozen solyd]

Wow. This year's SVR has got to be one of the most exciting regional events I've ever been a part of.

1097, 852, and 368, you guys are awesome. You really made us re-think our strategy on the fly after you creamed us in the first match (although its disappointing that the outcome of the match had to be overturned by a penalty). But despite the disappointment of that first match, you still showed so much gracious professionalism in accepting the refs' decision, and gave us a real tough fight at the end.

We hold all three of you with the utmost respect, and admire your winning attitudes very much.

980 and 22, thanks for being such great alliance partners throughout the playoffs. We look forward to seeing both of you at nationals!

[NASAwelder]

Actually it makes it 7 years (sorry but its true).

I would like to congratulate all the teams who competed in this regional. I am always amazed with the design and operation of all the robots at the regionals I attend. I believe that FIRST has over 1,000 teams now that compete each year in the events and you will find probably 900 different types of robots at all of the events. I applaud all of the competing teams and those who even give it a shot. It is not easy to build a functioning robot in six weeks and then if you are successful in building one to be able to crowed six of them in such a small space and be able to drive them with such speed and skill as all the teams do.
But most of all I would like to applaud the three teams that we faced in the final matches 1097, 852, 368. I believe that these three teams showed the true spirit of FIRST by accepting the result of the first match with the 30 point penalty (although not happily ((but how could you))). And then going in to the next match full-on and giving our alliance a run for their money. I believe that we have all had penalties levied against our teams that we feel are either not fair, harsh, or sometimes we must admit just plain stupid, but as we go through life we will learn that this is the way of the judicial system by which we live (Like that traffic ticket I had to pay last year). I’m sure that all teams can relate to this in one way or another.

So I would not only like to congratulate the winners of the S.V.R. but all the teams that competed. Keep up the good work, study your math home work because, as “MARK LEON” says “YOU ARE OUR FUTURE”.

Best Wishes to All……

[DougHogg]

I would like to congratulate all the teams at the Silicon Valley Regional. This is Team 980's first year competing at this event, and I have to say that it is a truly great regional. The singing and dancing made it feel like a huge, wonderful party. The integrity and gracious professionalism of the teams made me feel that I had found many new friends.

I would particularly like to acknowledge Teams 1097, 852, and 368 for their gracious professionalism after their apparent win over our alliance in the first match of the finals turned out to be a loss because of a 30 point penalty. You played your heart out in that match and showed great spirit, beating our alliance 47 to 30 without the penalty. I intend to watch our videos of that match, because I think that it sets a very high standard of excellence in strategy and play. You had a great alliance. Who knows what would have happened had there been a third match. We changed our strategy after the first match, and I am sure that you would have made changes in your strategy after the 2nd. But my main point is that even with the disappointment of losing, your teams displayed the highest level of gracious professionalism. (Team 368, you proved that you truly deserved your Chairman's Award.) Our team would be honored if we could partner with each of your teams in the future.

As for the referee ruling, I think that it is important for us to keep in mind the overall importance of safety and the fact that referees are entrusted with the responsibility of keeping the contestants, field handlers and spectators safe. It is a very important job, because quite honestly, we wouldn't have a FIRST competition for very long at all if the referees didn't do that job and do it extremely well.

This year, FIRST has made a point of stating the Safety must be the highest priority. I am quite sure that this was stated with very good reason. We must all be very safety conscious if we wish our competition to continue. According to the head referee's post in another Silicon Valley Regional thread, the referees felt that an unsafe condition occurred in that first finals match and so they awarded a 30 point penalty to the #1 alliance. On the other hand, I am totally sure that no team in the Silicon Valley Regional intended to create an unsafe situation, but it happened anyway. So at this point, I think that all teams can learn an extremely important lesson from this match. As we go on to other events this year and in years to come, we have to keep safety firmly in mind at all times.

Those who remember our 13 foot-long arm swinging out over the referees heads at the Chatsworth scrimmage (and the valid disqualifications for same) in 2003 may get a chuckle that a member of our team has the nerve to post about safety. But we took that to heart and made many safety improvements that made our robot safe. We also pointed out areas where our arm would go if all our safety features failed which they never did again in competition. (While practicing at our shop, that very same arm one day rose up but didn't swing. As the arm's designer approached to find the problem, it suddenly swung and hit him right between the eyes, so even the creators aren't immune to the effects of their creations.)

Getting back to the first finals match at this year's Silicon Valley Regional, I imagine that the referees had the following rules in mind in addition to any other considerations:

<S01> If at any time the ROBOT operation is deemed unsafe, by the determination of the referees, the ROBOT will be disabled for the remainder of the match.

S05> A ROBOT may not impede the placement of TETRAS on the loading structures or the hand-off of a TETRA by a HUMAN PLAYER to a ROBOT. No HUMAN PLAYER or field attendant may be accosted by a ROBOT while placing TETRAS. Violations will result immediate disabling of the offending ROBOT, and disqualification of the alliance.

Would it be valid to disable a blue team if that blue team accidentally accosted a field attendant in the blue loading zone? I would say, "Absolutely" because that action would endanger that attendant and the whole future of the FIRST Robotics Competition. Although it had not occurred to me before, the same can be said for the action that took place in the first SVR finals match (pushing an opponent into a partner who is in the loading zone), even though it was totally unintentional. The fact is that unless we all want to participate in a video-version of FIRST, we have to recognize that we have something special that requires constant alertness to safety on our part so that we get to keep competing with machines interacting with people.

Here's to future generations being able to experience the same joy that we have from the FIRST Robotics Competition, because we (meaning all of us participating in FIRST) kept it safe.

Thanks again to all our partners and opponents at the Silicon Valley Regional. All of you have our highest admiration and respect!

Lastly, thanks to the Silicon Valley Referees for doing a great job and for helping to make sure that all of us got to go home after the event and not to a hospital -- I hate having to go to those places. :-)

[Alex1072]

Originally Posted by DougHogg

This year, FIRST has made a point of stating the Safety must be the highest priority. I am quite sure that this was stated with very good reason. We must all be very safety conscious if we wish our competition to continue. According to the head referee's post in another Silicon Valley Regional thread, the referees felt that an unsafe condition occurred in that first finals match and so they awarded a 30 point penalty to the #1 alliance. On the other hand, I am totally sure that no team in the Silicon Valley Regional intended to create an unsafe situation, but it happened anyway. So at this point, I think that all teams can learn an extremely important lesson from this match. As we go on to other events this year and in years to come, we have to keep safety firmly in mind at all times.

...

Getting back to the first finals match at this year's Silicon Valley Regional, I imagine that the referees had the following rules in mind in addition to any other considerations:

<S01> If at any time the ROBOT operation is deemed unsafe, by the determination of the referees, the ROBOT will be disabled for the remainder of the match.

S05> A ROBOT may not impede the placement of TETRAS on the loading structures or the hand-off of a TETRA by a HUMAN PLAYER to a ROBOT. No HUMAN PLAYER or field attendant may be accosted by a ROBOT while placing TETRAS. Violations will result immediate disabling of the offending ROBOT, and disqualification of the alliance.

The problem that I have with this ruling is that Team Update #4, Example 8 states:

Robot "RED01" is in the red alliance loading zone, retrieving a tetra. Robot "BLUE01" is next to the loading zone, but clearly not touching the loading zone or RED01. Robot "RED02" approaches BLUE01, and pushes BLUE01 into the loading zone, where it contacts RED01 and prevents it from completing the tetra retrieval. No penalty is assessed against either alliance. RED02 was the source of the interference. Because BLUE01 was merely the object used by RED02 to interfere, and not the source of the interference, it did not violate <G15>. The red alliance is not given a penalty, because interference with their own alliance partners is permitted (although not very wise).

Since this is exactly what happened in the final match, this situation was not really a judgment call, but a mistake. If the judges felt that it was a safety issue according to rule S01 or S05, the offending robot should have been disabled as those rules state. This is not to say that the people involved are bad people or did it on purpose. I think the level of professionalism of people in FIRST is such that this would not happen. Either way it is my opinion that alliance #1 is owed an apology at the very least. If I was in charge I would give both alliances an invitation to the championships as an exception and a recognition that a mistake was made. Just my .02.

[DougHogg]

Originally Posted by Alex1072

The problem that I have with this ruling is that Team Update #4, Example 8 states:



Since this is exactly what happened in the final match, this situation was not really a judgment call, but a mistake. If the judges felt that it was a safety issue according to rule S01 or S05, the offending robot should have been disabled as those rules state. This is not to say that the people involved are bad people or did it on purpose. I think the level of professionalism of people in FIRST is such that this would not happen. Either way it is my opinion that alliance #1 is owed an apology at the very least. If I was in charge I would give both alliances an invitation to the championships as an exception and a recognition that a mistake was made. Just my .02.

Thanks for the reply.

I would venture a guess that the unsafe condition ceased to exist and that the referees then imposed the 30 point penalty instead of disabling the robot responsible for the situation.

Since 2002 when I started Team 980, we have never seen a rule that imposed a thirty point penalty before. It seems to be only one step below being disabled. One thing for sure, I think that it is clear that we are well advised to not cause any impacts with robots in the loading areas. In fact, at the beginning of the Silicon Valley Regional, a mentor from Team 1280 passed on some friendly advice to me, suggesting that we make sure that none of our alliance members bump anyone in the loading zone, as 30 point penalties had been handed out in Sacramento.

True, bumping an opponent into a partner who is in the loading zone seems to be allowed per the rule you quoted, but once again, if safety is threatened, the referees have to act. They then have the authority to apply any level of penalty they deem necessary to prevent the situation from continuing, or to prevent the situation from happening again in the future. In other words, I don't see it as a disable or "do nothing" decision.

In fact, in my opinion, the rule that you quoted should be changed. The truth is, causing any kind of collision in the loading zone is dangerous to the field attendants, and anything dangerous in a FIRST competition needs to be prevented. One way of doing that is to award a 30 point penalty when it occurs so as to strongly discourage that action. A more severe way is to shut off the responsible robot.

I doubt if any referee wants to shut down one of the robots. They apply judgement and suit the penalty to the severity of the situation at the time.

It seems to me that making sure someone's eye doesn't get poked out is more important than any other concern.

In other sports, referees have the benefit of years of experience and a gradual refinement of the rules to cover any holes or conflicts that show up. Since our game is new every year, our referees have to apply their judgement to situations as they occur. One thing that I am totally certain about, is that any action endangering a person will always be penalized, regardless of any other rules in the rule book. In FIRST, safety comes first.

Probably our referees should be paid $5000 per match. They have a huge responsibility, and every year have to spend hours studying complex rules for the new game, rules that haven't been tested in actual competition. I would personally like to apologize to the referees for not previously acknowledging them for the great job that they do. This year, that job is even tougher because there are more robots on the field. What is amazing is that they referee these competitions for free to support us and FIRST.

[Anthony Kesich]

Everyone, let's just drop the discussion of the finals. We know there was a call that some people believe to be wrong, but what will we accomplish by bickering about it?

I really enjoyed SVR. Our team outranked 254 for the second time at the end of qualifying rounds. I cannot say I can be much prouder seeing that as of last year we were used to sitting in the mid 20s for ranking.

Thanks go out to Kevin Watson and team 691. Our Hall Effects Sensors fried on Thursday and they graciously donated materials to get us running again so my autonomous could work.

Props to 1280 also for donating some much needed surgical tubing so we could rig up some of our sensors.

And thank you again 114. I know we had your Dremel for almost the entire regional.

Again, I just want to say that no matter what the outcome, everyone had a great time.

-Tony K

[Cory]

If anybody else would like to discuss the call made in finals match 1, please direct all discussion here